Letters To The Editor

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

July 07, 2005

Democrats seek to stifle the will of the public

In relation to Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's retirement, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy says, "If the president abuses his power and nominates someone who threatens to roll back the rights and freedoms of the American people, the American people will insist that we oppose that nominee" ("Stage set for battle over a nominee to high court," July 2).

Abuses his power? The last time the Democratic nominee for president got more than 50 percent of the popular vote was in 1976, almost 30 years ago.

In the 103rd Congress (1993-1995) there were 56 Democratic senators. Today, there are 44 Democratic senators.

What part of "representative democracy" does Mr. Kennedy not understand?

The American people have exercised their rights and freedoms.

The Democrats have abused their power, diminished as it is, by doing everything they can to nullify the election of 2004 and the will of the people.

Terrence H. Scout

Chestertown

O'Connor isn't model for the next justice

The Sun's editorial "Justice at the center" (July 2) opines that "as he looks to replace her, Mr. Bush would do well to choose someone very much like Justice O'Connor."

Has The Sun already forgotten that Justice O'Connor was the swing vote in the court's 5-4 ruling which gave George W. Bush the presidency back in 2000?

Since 2000, the Bush administration has given us the quagmire in Iraq, an unprecedented and ever-mounting national debt, the continuing U.S. neglect of the global-warming problem, the ongoing repeal of decades of environmental progress, a steady erosion of American civil rights and the isolation of the United States from the civilized world.

Responsibility for these incalculable disasters can be set squarely on the shoulders of Justice O'Connor for her disgraceful participation in the court's 2000 decision.

The last thing the country needs is another justice in her mold.

Howard E. Bond

Cockeysville

Carnage in Iraq is Bush's real legacy

The very notion that President Bush will find "a respite from more difficult issues" while the political world and Americans in general focus on his nomination to fill a Supreme Court vacancy is appalling ("Court choice lets Bush shift subject, say conservatives," July 4).

Yes, his court appointment will affect our nation for years to come - and that alone is a scary prospect for those of us who question his judgment and oppose his far-right agenda. But putting that aside, the thought that this presidential duty provides some kind of relief from other matters is especially offensive.

And to the conservative quoted as saying, "It's really the justices or nothing if he's going to leave a real legacy," I offer this opinion: Mr. Bush's legacy will be the dark chapter in American history he precipitated with his arrogant and misguided decision to wage war in Iraq, which has led to the totally unnecessary loss of more than 1,700 (and counting) brave American soldiers, the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi citizens, and the loss of respect for our country around the world.

Bill Blackwell

Timonium

Don't let court fight obscure other issues

The Sun's front-page article "Court choice lets Bush shift subject, say conservatives" (July 4) seems to consider the attention shift to the Supreme Court and away from Social Security and the Iraq war a foregone conclusion.

But why is this the case? Those other issues remain of momentous consequence to the nation. There has simply been one more grave issue added to the mix.

It is apparent that all forms of the media have thus far been well able to report on both Social Security and the war, simultaneously and effectively.

Using the retirement of Justice O'Connor to deflect attention from these equally important issues can only aid the current administration's efforts to impose its will.

Phillip Branner

Baltimore

How do Democrats win distinction?

For the record, as a true conservative (there is nothing "neo" about me), I agree with Rep. Wayne T. Gilchrest's current misgivings about our being in Iraq. But let's not forget that his vote helped put us there.

And what struck me most about Gwyneth K. Shaw's article "Gilchrest emerges as war's quiet critic" (July 3) was her statement that, "Gilchrest has distinguished himself by his willingness to buck his party."

When was the last time a Democrat was charactized as "distinguished" for bucking his or her party?

Dave Reich

Perry Hall

Phillips anchored the harbor's success

We all would be remiss in reflecting about the success of Harborplace without acknowledging the role that the Phillips family played ("Waterfront project put city on the map," July 1).

A Maryland icon for more than 50 years at the time Harborplace opened, Phillips Seafood Restaurants had never ventured beyond the Ocean City limits.

It took great courage and foresight for the family to agree to anchor this project in Baltimore's Inner Harbor.

Without the presence of this restaurant, the initial leasing of the space would have been almost impossible.